日治中期(1920-1937)台灣反殖運動由早期的武力對位進入翻轉政治文化宰制之敘事脈絡，殖者和被殖者的身分想像由前期的二元對抗轉為模糊遊移、矛盾共生的不確定性主奴辯證關係，與後殖民理論家巴巴指涉的混雜、戲擬、居間之論述框架若合符節。回涉日治半甲子之歷史圖像，但凡主要行動者關係之置換交易、近代性與傳統性之越界意象、身分認同主體性之捍衛位移、乃至抗日團體之勃興頓挫，概以此一時期為蒿矢，相關先行研究已有可觀成果。但究其實，出脫傳統史實之思辯，現有論旨殊多踵武自我與他者之間非此非比、亦此亦彼的敘事織品，呈現一種不確定性的灰色混雜情境。惟此種情境再現符碼之本質為何？迄今仍缺乏多維度的詮釋架構。如何從這旁逸曼衍的混雜性中歸納其本真性，厥為本文的重要發想。進言之，本文問題意識在於：如何在現有混雜性之核心命題上侵越門檻，去推曉其灰色光譜與位域？其本體基礎及形構途徑為何？思辯層次有無透過工具理性加以解釋的常則？本文擬透過結構主義與後殖民主義載體，進想上述圓轉無定的混雜性得以比較不混雜的面貌再現，庶幾嘗試概念化這個差異性多語境，呈現另一種看見。

During the mid-term period of Japanese colonization in Taiwan (1920-1937), the anti-colonization activities moved from armed conflict to social and cultural maneuvers against political domination. Instead of an initial dual confrontation, the relationship between the colonist and the colonized peoples turned into an ambivalent and co-existing phenomenon, which cohered perfectly with the key concepts of hybridity, third space, in-between and ambivalence presented by critical theorist Homi Bhabha. Such terms describe the ways in which colonized peoples have resisted the power of the colonizer. At this time, many historical incidents including the role replacement of main actors, the crossed culture of modernity and tradition, the complexity and uncertainty of national identity, as well as the rise and fall of anti-colonist movements could often be witnessed. Looking into the 17-year rebellion history, the current academic discussion mostly centers on the hybridity and ambivalence of a gray colonial phenomenon developed by the ruler and the ruled. Yet there has been no research so far on what the true identity of this gray hybridity is. The main purpose of this essay is to analyze the denotation and connotation of this hybridity by way of post-colonialism and structuralism theories.